151–160 of 495 posts
1. Apple takes iPhone stability and security Very Seriously. 2. ??? 3. Therefore, if you write native iPhone apps, you must use C derivatives that expose raw pointers and direct memory access.
Yeah, as if Flash is known for its stability (especially on the Apple platform) and security…
Getting away from the frenzied rhetoric, my opinion is that what Apple really wants to prevent is people releasing multi-platform compilers. So taking Flash as just one example, if I can build one app and the compiler can make me an iPhone executable, an Android executable, and so forth, Apple don't want that. In my experience so far with such "cross platform compatibility layers," they always produce results that wa…
If the cross-platform experience is subpar, Apple should just let these apps fail in the market.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Really? Bullshit. You honestly believe that stuff made in Obj-C can only be a toy whereas something written in ActionScript will bring the "strong innovation"? Yes, they're certainly restricting developer freedom (which, again, I don't like any more then anyone else), for the same reason they have been in the past: because they don't want their users to have a shitty experience. I mean, how the hell do you define a "…
Tumult's point is not about writing a single script-based solution but rather about developing an enabling technology for a whole raft of solutions. A platform-on-platform.
Looking forward to Adobe's response. Going to wager it'll be in the form of a lawsuit, and that the FCC will get involved. Whip out the marshmallows, this should be interesting :)
I'd love to see something like Logo or MIT's Scratch for the iPad. As I think about introducing my kids to computers that totally makes sense. This new language from Apple seems to preclude that. It is totally off base.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It won't get there before the iPhone is obsolete. You really think that web apps are ever going to get access the microphone or the camera? Also, a stop gap? I think there's an app for that.
"Mobile" is what will become obsolete. These new devices are handheld computers pretending to be phones. Someday they will embrace this reality, and inherit all of the progress that's already played out on PCs/laptops - browsers, flash, etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have been a very loyal mac user for years and love it, but I'm seriously considering going back to Linux. I am not a free software "zealot" and don't mind some closed-ness, but this is getting absolutely insane. Enforcing which LANGUAGES can be used on a platform?!? Insane! Edit: I've been looking at these guys: http://www.system76.com/ (I don't work with or have any vested interest in them, but they look cool.)
Boycotting the Mac platform (which is pretty much free of any such absurdity) doesn't make a lot of sense to me. That's where Apple is doing things right . You should of course, shun iPhone OS devices if you feel this way. The system76 laptops are probably generic machines from Clevo, Sager or some such with a custom badge. Alienware used to do the same thing.
ALL other user interfaces by ALL other vendors suck.
For some reason, no human beings on the entire planet other than those that work at One Infinite Loop in Cupertino are capable of doing a UI.
I can think of only two (tenuously) justifiable reasons for this. 1 - Perhaps, during the beta, they want code written in C (and derivatives) to aid in debugging framework bugs. Rather than "My App doesn't WORK!!!!! (Using MonoTouch Vxxyy)", they can get a repro using a stack they know and control top to bottom. In this case, I can see it as justified. 2 - If it's specifically to target cross-compilers as a business…
Surely there's also the approval process? Checking an app isn't doing anything malicious may be easier if it's written with standard tools.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tumult's point is not about writing a single script-based solution but rather about developing an enabling technology for a whole raft of solutions. A platform-on-platform.
Even granted that, the reason Apple doesn't want that is still because of the UX. Apps with the same codebase for Android/iPhone will automatically suck as far as the UI is concerned. Things like the lack of multitouch gestures on android, different screen sizes, &c. Certainly has never worked well on desktop platforms... see: Java UI toolkits, QT (which looks fairly native but tends to feel very wrong), Adobe Air, &…
1. Apple takes iPhone stability and security Very Seriously. 2. ??? 3. Therefore, if you write native iPhone apps, you must use C derivatives that expose raw pointers and direct memory access.
You haven't used XCode's Build and Analyze have you?
- There is a bug with the compiler not properly counting references when assigning a variable that needs a release to a property marked "retain". The property will increment the reference count, expecting the caller to decrement it, but the static analyzer does not see this, and so fails to warn.
- http://www.openradar.appspot.com/7338181 - CodeSense fails to work when Static Analysis is turned on.
(DISCLAIMER: I am using Xcode 3.2.1 on Snow Leopard 10.6.3)